S4 vs. WRX
09-06-2001, 01:20 AM
#1
New Member
Thread Starter
Join Date: Aug 2001
Posts: 4
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
S4 vs. WRX
Don't you guys think that it's a better comparison than S4 vs. M3? Don't get me wrong, all three are nice cars but you can't compare apples and oranges. S4 and M3 are different types of cars. S4 is AWD, turboed, sedan, etc. Whereas the M3 is rear wheel drive, naturally aspirated, coupe, etc. Some of you might say that the S4 can make more hp, ofcourse it could, it's boosted. All one has to do is upgrade to bigger turbos, crank up the boost, bigger downpipes and exhaust, etc. There's no way that one can crank out the same amount of extra hp from a naturally aspirated motor (and we're not talking muscle car motors here) unless you add boost via turbo or supercharger. Not to say that the E46 M3 is slow, it's still much faster (in stock form) than most mod S4s out there.
What you guys should really be comparing is S4 vs. WRX. Why isn't anyone making this comparison? They're both AWD, turboed (well, S4 = twin, WRX = single), sedan, 250 hp vs. 227 hp stock, you get the idea. Let's ignore the price and luxury amenities, these cars are pretty comparable as far as performance is concern. S4s w/ RS4 parts (turbos, dwnpipe, etc.), chipped,... can probably run in the 12s. The same goes for the WRX, w/ bigger turbo, more boost, bigger dwnpipe, exhaust, etc.
Why aren't you guys making this comparison? I'm just tired of seeing/hearing about S4 vs. M3 when it should really be S4 vs. WRX. And please, no flames. I love the S4, WRX, and M3 but I think that you guys should be comparing apples with apples and oranges with oranges.
What you guys should really be comparing is S4 vs. WRX. Why isn't anyone making this comparison? They're both AWD, turboed (well, S4 = twin, WRX = single), sedan, 250 hp vs. 227 hp stock, you get the idea. Let's ignore the price and luxury amenities, these cars are pretty comparable as far as performance is concern. S4s w/ RS4 parts (turbos, dwnpipe, etc.), chipped,... can probably run in the 12s. The same goes for the WRX, w/ bigger turbo, more boost, bigger dwnpipe, exhaust, etc.
Why aren't you guys making this comparison? I'm just tired of seeing/hearing about S4 vs. M3 when it should really be S4 vs. WRX. And please, no flames. I love the S4, WRX, and M3 but I think that you guys should be comparing apples with apples and oranges with oranges.
09-06-2001, 03:29 AM
#2
New Member
Join Date: Mar 2000
Posts: 62
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
The Ultimate Comparo of S4 vs. WRX
To assist others in their unbiased search for the truth, here are some keen observations regarding the C&D article, along with insightful thoughts regarding my former *extremely elegant* 6-speed S4 sedan versus my current *butt-ugly* 5-speed WRX wagon.
Since 2 out of 3 testers picked the WRX, C&D is not entitled to say "our collective minds" simply liked the S4 60% better. They should have said that one clueless nimrod, who wouldn't know a performance value if it bit him in the ***, ranked the WRX third behind that hapless BMW for some inexplicable reason, allowing the S4 to sneak into first place.
The WRX was tested using truly hideous stock RE92s. The stock S4 tires had a Y rating and can't possibly be as awful, although AoA's ability to equip S4s with crappy tires should never be underestimated. Run them both with equivalent 17" tires and they're likely wheel-to-wheel on the road course.
C&D was far too kind about the S4 shifter, which they describe as rubbery. The stock S4 shifter is unthinkably horrible and doesn't get much better over time. After 8000 miles, I added an aftermarket short shifter which helped considerably, but even then the S4 shifter was still not as good as the stock WRX. With the stock S4 shifter, you have to "fish" for the 2-3 shift and the 1-2 shift is clumsy and slow by comparison. Stock-to-stock, the WRX's gearbox and its *much* lighter clutch makes the Audi's shifting seem like a garbage truck, but I'm probably not exaggerating enough.
Another thing C&D didn't mention was wind noise. There is actually less with the WRX when all the windows are up versus the S4. Also, in the WRX wagon you can put down all the windows and the driver's left ear doesn't get buffeted by the wind, which always happened in the S4 despite adjusting the moonroof and rear windows (very annoying). [Maybe I should consider plastic surgery to reduce the size of my left ear, but getting the WRX was a less painful alternative. My ears are extremely sensitive and getting that operation could hamper my sex life.]
The gauges are easier to read in the WRX since the S4 steering wheel can easily block the top half of the readouts; however, the red gauges and interior lighting in the S4 are magnificient, especially at night when you turn on the lights, which is usually a good idea unless you're running from the cops or something.
Extra turbo lag in the WRX doesn't bother me at all, because I use the right freakin gears! Throttle response in the WRX is decent and more predictable than the finnicky drive-by-wire on the S4, which is possessed by the devil.
Those impressive 0-60 times are worthless in everyday driving unless you want to abuse your clutch (and smell it for a long time) and frag the tranny eventually. In the real world, what matters is mid-range response in the *correct* gear. Those 30-50 times in high gear are utter nonsense. What difference does it make which car can be lugged faster? Lugging is not fun and also bad for the powertrain. In the mid-range in proper gears, the S4 and WRX are pretty much dead even, with a slight edge going to the S4.
Another thing not mentioned is the excess heat generated under the hood of the S4, even with moderate driving. That can't be very good over the long run. By comparison, you can touch the WRX's intercooler with your bare hand immediately after shutting off the engine. I may be wrong, but the WRX might be less prone to loss of power due to heatsoak. Plus, when you switch off the WRX, there is no clunking, thunking, or whirring like with the S4 (sometimes you just want to kick the damn thing to make it stop).
Of course, the S4 is *way* smoother and it "feels" like a much more powerful car. You have to push the WRX a little more to keep pace, but you can *definitely* hang if you drive like a drunken monkey on crack. The usual comeback from an S4 owner is "I'll get a chip and smoke your ***" but they dare not say such a thing to WRX drivers.
The premium stereo in the WRX is at least as good as the Bose system in the S4, which was too harsh on my ears, especially the big left one. [Bose harshness is exacerbated by the left ear flapping when the S4 driver's window is down.]
The S4 is far more comforting to passengers. If you take curves at the same speed in the WRX, your passengers will be terrified, but they don't seem to get as agitated in the S4, especially human females. (I'm pretty sure about this based on repeated trials using BMW owners as guinea pigs.)
Hope this helps.
Since 2 out of 3 testers picked the WRX, C&D is not entitled to say "our collective minds" simply liked the S4 60% better. They should have said that one clueless nimrod, who wouldn't know a performance value if it bit him in the ***, ranked the WRX third behind that hapless BMW for some inexplicable reason, allowing the S4 to sneak into first place.
The WRX was tested using truly hideous stock RE92s. The stock S4 tires had a Y rating and can't possibly be as awful, although AoA's ability to equip S4s with crappy tires should never be underestimated. Run them both with equivalent 17" tires and they're likely wheel-to-wheel on the road course.
C&D was far too kind about the S4 shifter, which they describe as rubbery. The stock S4 shifter is unthinkably horrible and doesn't get much better over time. After 8000 miles, I added an aftermarket short shifter which helped considerably, but even then the S4 shifter was still not as good as the stock WRX. With the stock S4 shifter, you have to "fish" for the 2-3 shift and the 1-2 shift is clumsy and slow by comparison. Stock-to-stock, the WRX's gearbox and its *much* lighter clutch makes the Audi's shifting seem like a garbage truck, but I'm probably not exaggerating enough.
Another thing C&D didn't mention was wind noise. There is actually less with the WRX when all the windows are up versus the S4. Also, in the WRX wagon you can put down all the windows and the driver's left ear doesn't get buffeted by the wind, which always happened in the S4 despite adjusting the moonroof and rear windows (very annoying). [Maybe I should consider plastic surgery to reduce the size of my left ear, but getting the WRX was a less painful alternative. My ears are extremely sensitive and getting that operation could hamper my sex life.]
The gauges are easier to read in the WRX since the S4 steering wheel can easily block the top half of the readouts; however, the red gauges and interior lighting in the S4 are magnificient, especially at night when you turn on the lights, which is usually a good idea unless you're running from the cops or something.
Extra turbo lag in the WRX doesn't bother me at all, because I use the right freakin gears! Throttle response in the WRX is decent and more predictable than the finnicky drive-by-wire on the S4, which is possessed by the devil.
Those impressive 0-60 times are worthless in everyday driving unless you want to abuse your clutch (and smell it for a long time) and frag the tranny eventually. In the real world, what matters is mid-range response in the *correct* gear. Those 30-50 times in high gear are utter nonsense. What difference does it make which car can be lugged faster? Lugging is not fun and also bad for the powertrain. In the mid-range in proper gears, the S4 and WRX are pretty much dead even, with a slight edge going to the S4.
Another thing not mentioned is the excess heat generated under the hood of the S4, even with moderate driving. That can't be very good over the long run. By comparison, you can touch the WRX's intercooler with your bare hand immediately after shutting off the engine. I may be wrong, but the WRX might be less prone to loss of power due to heatsoak. Plus, when you switch off the WRX, there is no clunking, thunking, or whirring like with the S4 (sometimes you just want to kick the damn thing to make it stop).
Of course, the S4 is *way* smoother and it "feels" like a much more powerful car. You have to push the WRX a little more to keep pace, but you can *definitely* hang if you drive like a drunken monkey on crack. The usual comeback from an S4 owner is "I'll get a chip and smoke your ***" but they dare not say such a thing to WRX drivers.
The premium stereo in the WRX is at least as good as the Bose system in the S4, which was too harsh on my ears, especially the big left one. [Bose harshness is exacerbated by the left ear flapping when the S4 driver's window is down.]
The S4 is far more comforting to passengers. If you take curves at the same speed in the WRX, your passengers will be terrified, but they don't seem to get as agitated in the S4, especially human females. (I'm pretty sure about this based on repeated trials using BMW owners as guinea pigs.)
Hope this helps.
09-06-2001, 04:04 AM
#3
AudiWorld Super User
Join Date: Nov 2000
Posts: 11,069
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Unbiased? Pfft... hardly. Bash away.
The WRX was tested using truly hideous stock RE92s. The stock S4 tires had a Y rating and can't possibly be as awful, although AoA's ability to equip S4s with crappy tires should never be underestimated. Run them both with equivalent 17" tires and they're likely wheel-to-wheel on the road course.
Mmmkay. Tires. Maybe, of course, the WRX, by your own admission, will still have to be driven like a drunken monkey to keep up.
WRX. With the stock S4 shifter, you have to "fish" for the 2-3 shift and the 1-2 shift is clumsy and slow by comparison. Stock-to-stock, the WRX's gearbox and its *much* lighter clutch makes the Audi's shifting seem like a garbage truck, but I'm probably not exaggerating enough.
Oh please... a garbage truck? Yes, the shifter is poor but that's a bit extreme.
Another thing C&D didn't mention was wind noise. There is actually less with the WRX when all the windows are up versus the S4. Also, in the WRX wagon you can put down all the windows and the driver's
The engine and road noise mask the wind noise.
The gauges are easier to read in the WRX since the S4 steering wheel can easily block the top half of the readouts; however, the red gauges and interior lighting in the S4 are magnificient, especially at night
I'm 6'3". If I adjust the steering wheel the gauges are not obscured.
Extra turbo lag in the WRX doesn't bother me at all, because I use the right freakin gears! Throttle response in the WRX is decent and more predictable than the finnicky drive-by-wire on the S4, which is possessed by the devil.
Finnicky? The S4 is responsive at almost any RPM you choose. Feeling lazy or chatting with occupants on the way to dinner? Start in 2nd and short shift... the 2.7t is perfectly happy and willing to comply. Turbo lag is not acceptable.
Those impressive 0-60 times are worthless in everyday driving unless you want to abuse your clutch (and smell it for a long time) and frag the tranny eventually. In the real world, what matters is mid-range response in the *correct* gear. Those 30-50 times in high gear are utter nonsense. What difference does it make which car can be lugged faster? Lugging is not fun and also bad for the powertrain. In the mid-range in proper gears, the S4 and WRX are pretty much dead even, with a slight edge going to the S4.
In the real world what matters is an engine that will do what you want, when you want. While the WRX may have to drop a gear or two to get on-boost to scoot around an Ford Excretion with 1 passenger the S4 simply needs a poke at the throttle in almost any gear to bring on 258 lb-ft of torque as low as 1850 rpm to
muscle by. No downshift. That matters in daily traffic. Less work, effortless speed.
Another thing not mentioned is the excess heat generated under the hood of the S4, even with moderate driving. That can't be very good over the long run. By comparison, you can touch the WRX's intercooler with your bare hand immediately after shutting off the engine. I may be wrong, but the WRX
might be less prone to loss of power due to heatsoak. Plus, when you switch off the WRX, there is no clunking, thunking, or whirring like with the S4 (sometimes you just want to kick the damn thing to make it stop).
Yes, there is heat. The whirring cools off the turbos. Wait 10 minutes and measure underhood temps... they'll probably be within a few degrees.
A car enthusiast would never kick a car.
The S4 is far more comforting to passengers. If you take curves at the same speed in the WRX, your passengers will be terrified, but they don't seem to get as agitated in the S4, especially human females. (I'm pretty sure about this based on repeated trials using BMW owners as guinea pigs.)
Well, there you go. : )
Mmmkay. Tires. Maybe, of course, the WRX, by your own admission, will still have to be driven like a drunken monkey to keep up.
WRX. With the stock S4 shifter, you have to "fish" for the 2-3 shift and the 1-2 shift is clumsy and slow by comparison. Stock-to-stock, the WRX's gearbox and its *much* lighter clutch makes the Audi's shifting seem like a garbage truck, but I'm probably not exaggerating enough.
Oh please... a garbage truck? Yes, the shifter is poor but that's a bit extreme.
Another thing C&D didn't mention was wind noise. There is actually less with the WRX when all the windows are up versus the S4. Also, in the WRX wagon you can put down all the windows and the driver's
The engine and road noise mask the wind noise.
The gauges are easier to read in the WRX since the S4 steering wheel can easily block the top half of the readouts; however, the red gauges and interior lighting in the S4 are magnificient, especially at night
I'm 6'3". If I adjust the steering wheel the gauges are not obscured.
Extra turbo lag in the WRX doesn't bother me at all, because I use the right freakin gears! Throttle response in the WRX is decent and more predictable than the finnicky drive-by-wire on the S4, which is possessed by the devil.
Finnicky? The S4 is responsive at almost any RPM you choose. Feeling lazy or chatting with occupants on the way to dinner? Start in 2nd and short shift... the 2.7t is perfectly happy and willing to comply. Turbo lag is not acceptable.
Those impressive 0-60 times are worthless in everyday driving unless you want to abuse your clutch (and smell it for a long time) and frag the tranny eventually. In the real world, what matters is mid-range response in the *correct* gear. Those 30-50 times in high gear are utter nonsense. What difference does it make which car can be lugged faster? Lugging is not fun and also bad for the powertrain. In the mid-range in proper gears, the S4 and WRX are pretty much dead even, with a slight edge going to the S4.
In the real world what matters is an engine that will do what you want, when you want. While the WRX may have to drop a gear or two to get on-boost to scoot around an Ford Excretion with 1 passenger the S4 simply needs a poke at the throttle in almost any gear to bring on 258 lb-ft of torque as low as 1850 rpm to
muscle by. No downshift. That matters in daily traffic. Less work, effortless speed.
Another thing not mentioned is the excess heat generated under the hood of the S4, even with moderate driving. That can't be very good over the long run. By comparison, you can touch the WRX's intercooler with your bare hand immediately after shutting off the engine. I may be wrong, but the WRX
might be less prone to loss of power due to heatsoak. Plus, when you switch off the WRX, there is no clunking, thunking, or whirring like with the S4 (sometimes you just want to kick the damn thing to make it stop).
Yes, there is heat. The whirring cools off the turbos. Wait 10 minutes and measure underhood temps... they'll probably be within a few degrees.
A car enthusiast would never kick a car.
The S4 is far more comforting to passengers. If you take curves at the same speed in the WRX, your passengers will be terrified, but they don't seem to get as agitated in the S4, especially human females. (I'm pretty sure about this based on repeated trials using BMW owners as guinea pigs.)
Well, there you go. : )
09-06-2001, 04:50 AM
#5
Junior Member
Join Date: Mar 2000
Posts: 984
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
No mention of the exterior? I think that is where the true prob with the Scooby is. That front end..
Facha brute!
I think both are awesome cars to drive and each have low points, but both have high points that WAY out measure the low points.
If the Scooby didn't have a front end that looked like a frog after three hits of the rock, I'd get it in a heartbeat.
I think both are awesome cars to drive and each have low points, but both have high points that WAY out measure the low points.
If the Scooby didn't have a front end that looked like a frog after three hits of the rock, I'd get it in a heartbeat.
09-06-2001, 05:42 AM
#6
Member
Join Date: Jul 2000
Posts: 3,085
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
You can't compare the S4 and WRX
Hey, I love the WRX. It's got spunk like my BMW 2002 (only a lot more of it!). But think about it, you can compare the performance of the two cars but let's be real.
Performance is the ONLY reason to buy a WRX.
Performance is only one of the reasons to buy an S4.
I think that was the gist of the C&D article. The S4 feels like a fast $40K car. The Subie feels like a fast $25K car. If all you want is FAST buy the Subie. If you want FAST and luxury you ante up another $15K for the Audi. Enough said.
Performance is the ONLY reason to buy a WRX.
Performance is only one of the reasons to buy an S4.
I think that was the gist of the C&D article. The S4 feels like a fast $40K car. The Subie feels like a fast $25K car. If all you want is FAST buy the Subie. If you want FAST and luxury you ante up another $15K for the Audi. Enough said.
Trending Topics
09-06-2001, 06:42 AM
#8
AudiWorld Super User
Join Date: Mar 2000
Posts: 9,705
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Huh?
<i>By comparison, you can touch the WRX's intercooler with your bare hand immediately after shutting off the engine. I may be wrong, but the WRX might be less prone to loss of power due to heatsoak.</i>
The intercooler has a scoop right above it, correct? Of course after driving, it will feel cool to the touch. You were just pushing ambient air onto it. Come back in an hour and tell me what it feels like. They heak soak like any other turbo car.
The intercooler has a scoop right above it, correct? Of course after driving, it will feel cool to the touch. You were just pushing ambient air onto it. Come back in an hour and tell me what it feels like. They heak soak like any other turbo car.
